Drew Bosley ran his 7:36 there
Drew Bosley ran his 7:36 there
Seriously is there a reason why you think times run at BU's track are "fake"? Do you think the track is short, cuz thats one reason ive heard about in the past
Innovation is how civilization moved beyond the stone age.
We're all talking about distance times, but what I'm wondering about is are sprint times just as fast? Or is it just distance times that are fast?
Sub 4:30 is not the "average" club runner, sorry.
I know a kid who ran a 15sec personal best for 5K at BU track. 15sec faster than an outdoor time which was in near perfect weather conditions. Based on his cross season ('25) he wasn't even in that kind of fitness. His teammate ran like a 9sec 3K best ... again, coming off a cross season of average performances. So, I think the track probably does aid a little. But, you're basically in a heat with 15-20guys all gunning for it. It's like an Indy Car race almost.
What an idiotic thread. Nobody has ever broken 3:47 on the BU track, and 4 dudes have done it elsewhere. BU mile record is nearly 2 seconds off indoor WR. So, should we toss Liévin, JDL Fast Track, and Armory as well since they're "faster" tracks?
Coach!@#$% wrote:
Sub 4:30 is not the "average" club runner, sorry.
Weird. What's your objection? Is 4:30 slow or fast for an "average" club runner. The poster obviously isn't talking about a fun-run jogger club doing 25-minute 5Ks. Sound's about right for an "average" track-based hobby club? Or does it sound slow for an "average" pickier running club with entry standards for joining and races events like club nationals cross country?
Hmm I am going to disagree. I heard that it is actually a short track.
Boston engineering wrote:
Sorry but they just are. There should be two separate record books, BU nad everywhere else.
Umm he beat Pieter Sisk convincingly who is a 1:43/3:31 runner.
You people lack logic wrote:
What an idiotic thread. Nobody has ever broken 3:47 on the BU track, and 4 dudes have done it elsewhere. BU mile record is nearly 2 seconds off indoor WR. So, should we toss Liévin, JDL Fast Track, and Armory as well since they're "faster" tracks?
Jakob would've run 3:43.8 on BU's track the day he ran 3:45.1 in Lievin.
Brian Cavanagh wrote:
Never needed to consume bicarb because I learned in Physiology that the human body naturally makes the ingredients that buffer acids that bicarb is supposed to help with. I guess all the ppl thinking that bicarb works aren’t aware of what the body can do on its own with training and a reasonably healthy diet. “The human body buffers [acts to neutralize] muscle acid (specifically hydrogen ions, H+) produced during high-intensity exercise primarily through intracellular [within the muscle cells] chemical buffers—proteins, phosphates, and carnosine—that immediately bind H+. The bicarbonate buffering system then neutralizes excess acid in the blood, converting it into CO2 which is exhaled.” This means that it doesn’t matter how much bicarb a person consumes when their muscles have not first used their own buffers inside the muscle cells. Bicarbonate works in the blood, not in the muscles, and the body produces it anyway, so taking bicarb which could cause nausea and vomiting is really most effective at making supplement-sellers rich and not necessarily improving performance which the sellers claim (and sponsor research to the effect of).
You're right that the body does produce natural buffers to help neutralize hydrogen ions,
BUT, some people are naturally (genetically) better at this than others, even between elites. So, taking bicarb helps even out the playing field, so to speak. I suspect that's why bicarb helps some people more than others.
The same applies to Nitric Oxide (NO), which is a potent vasodilator (dilates blood vessels. allowing more oxygenated blood to reach muscles). A genetic adaptation found in many elite endurance athletes enables them to produce more NO naturally and gives them an edge in oxygen delivery. That's why many endurance athletes use supplemental NO as well.
Wherever you come down on the BU track question, it’s good to know the discussion has been had and the OP won’t need to relitigate next year.
Gumby Coach wrote:
You're right that the body does produce natural buffers to help neutralize hydrogen ions,
BUT, some people are naturally (genetically) better at this than others, even between elites. So, taking bicarb helps even out the playing field, so to speak. I suspect that's why bicarb helps some people more than others.The same applies to Nitric Oxide (NO), which is a potent vasodilator (dilates blood vessels. allowing more oxygenated blood to reach muscles). A genetic adaptation found in many elite endurance athletes enables them to produce more NO naturally and gives them an edge in oxygen delivery. That's why many endurance athletes use supplemental NO as well.
Why assume that an athlete that you are coaching is defficient in those resources?
99.9% of athletes and coaches have no idea that bicarbonate is an extra-cellular buffer. They don't know what that means and have zero interest in learning.
The poster that you are replying to is trying to tell you not to fall into this kind of thinking.
everyone knew the times meant nothing wrote:
I suspect Eamonn Coghlan became the "indoor guy" because he wasn't quite good enough to win outdoors in his era.
As I recall Coghlan was reputed to be very economical running corners indoors as he had a bit of a naturally choppy stride to begin with so did not have to alter his form as much? No way I could recall which particular issue now but i think it was an old T&FN article.